This paper, like its predecessors in the series, deals with the Sādhanasamuddeśa of Bhartṛhari’s Vākyapadīya (abbr. VP), focusing on VP 3.7.80－the samuddeśa ‘description’ in question is the seventh of the fourteen samuddeśas that constitute the third volume of the Vākyapadīya. The Sādhanasamuddeśa is meant for elucidating the concept of kāraka. Pāṇini provided kāraka classifications to connect certain semantic relations with grammatical expressions. From a semantic point of view, a kāraka is what brings to accomplishment an act denoted by a verb, so that it is characterized as sādhana ‘that which contributes the completion of an act'. A karman ‘object', which is one of the kārakas, is the topic to be dealt with in VP 3.7.45-89. In VP 3.7.45-46 Bhartṛhari has classified kāraka-entities to be assigned to the karman category as follows: 1. A kāraka-entity to be assigned to the karman category by A 1.4.49 kartur īpsitatamaṃ karma－three subtypes: that which is to be (a) made (nirvartya), (b) modified (vikārya), and (c) reached (prāpya) 2. A kāraka-entity to be assigned to the karman category by other rules (a) A 1.4.50 tathāyuktaṃ cānīpsitam－two subtypes: (a) that which is not desired by, hateful to, an agent (kartṛ) and (b) that to which an agent is indifferent (b) A 1.4.51 akathitaṃ ca (c) A kāraka-entity which has been assigned to another kāraka category by a rule and which is assigned to the karman category by the subsequent rule In VP 3.7.47-79 Bhartṛhari has discussed karaka-entities of types 1 and 2 (b) exhaustively, drawing the conclusion that if karman is defined, from a semantic point of view, as that kāraka which an agent wishes to obtain through the act in which it participates, this definition, which is established by the reformulation of A 1.4.49: kartur īpsitaṃ karma, can reasonably cover kāraka-entities of type 2(b) as well as those of types 1 (a)-(b). In VP 3.7 .80 (ahiteṣu yathā laulyāt kartur icchopajāyate / viṣādiṣu bhayādibhyas tathaivāsau pravartate //), Bhartṛhari states that just as, through greed, a desire to eat what is not good for a person who is sick comes over the person, so, through fear, a desire to take poison comes over a servant who is afflicted with the fear of the servant’s master. Clearly he intends to imply that the above-mentioned definition of karman can apply in a kāraka-entity of type 2 (a) such as poison (viṣa) in viṣaṃ bhakṣayati ‘He takes poison'. It is important to note that, according to Bhartṛhari, kāraka entities of types 2 (a)-(b)are properly treated as 1 (c) since they have the feature of l(c): the attainment of the status of being a cognitive object (ābhāsopagama, viṣayabhāvāpatti)In the Sādhanasamuddeśa, Bhartṛhari does not discuss a karman of type 2 (c). In grāmam adhiśete ‘He dwells in a village' the village (grāma) is assigned the name adhikaraṇa ‘locus’ by A 1.4.45 ādhāro ’dhikaraṇam and the name karman by A 1.4.46 adhiśīṅsthāsāṃ karma; according to the principle of anavakāśatva ‘lack of domain' A 1.4.46 takes precedence over A 1.4.45. In the samuddeśa in question Bhartṛhari is not concerned with derivations to be accounted for by following principles to decide which rules should take precedence over others in the kāraka section. It may be added that in his Prakāśa on VP 3.7.80 Helārāja seems not to be successful in explaining grammatically utterances in which karaka-entities of type 2 (c) are involved. His interpretation of the principle of paratva (A 1.4.2) is untenable.広島大学比較論理学プロジェクト研究センター研究成果報告書（2014年度）